The District Court of the United States for the State of Alabama
has not jurisdiction of suits instituted by the Bank of the United
States. This jurisdiction is not given in the act of Congress
establishing that court, nor is it conferred by the act
incorporating, the Bank of the United States.
Mr. Webster stated, that on inspecting the record of the
proceedings in the court below, he was satisfied the District Court
of Alabama had not jurisdiction of suits instituted by the Bank of
the United States. It has already been decided that the courts of
the United States have jurisdiction in suits brought by the bank
only by virtue of the special provision in the charter, and the
right of the bank to sue in the District Court of Alabama is not
given by the act incorporating the bank. He referred to the tenth
section of the Act of Congress of September 1789, and to the Act of
21 April, 1820, constituting the courts of Louisiana.
Bank of the United States v.
Deveaux, 5 Cranch 61.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE MARSHALL delivered the opinion of the
Court.
This is a writ of error to a judgment rendered in the Court of
the United States for the District of Alabama dismissing a suit
brought by the Bank of the United States in that court for want of
jurisdiction. Consequently the jurisdiction of that court presents
the only question to be considered.
The act which establishes a District court in the State of
Alabama declares that the judge thereof
"shall in all things have and exercise the same jurisdiction and
powers which were by law given to the judge of the Kentucky
District under an act entitled "An act to establish the judicial
courts of the United States" and an act entitled, "An act in
addition to the act entitled
An act to establish the judicial
courts of the United States,'" approved 2 March, 1793."
The 10th section of the Judiciary Act provides
"That the
Page 30 U. S. 480
Circuit Court in Kentucky shall, besides the jurisdiction
aforesaid, have jurisdiction of all other causes except appeals and
writs of error hereinafter made cognizable in a circuit court, and
shall proceed therein in the same manner as a circuit court."
The 11th section of the same act describes the jurisdiction of
the circuit court. A Bank of the United States did not then exist,
and it was determined by this Court in the case of
Bank of the
United States v. Deveaux
"that the courts of the United States could not take
jurisdiction of actions brought by the bank unless the declaration
contained averments which enabled the court to look behind the
corporate character of the plaintiff."
The judicial act, not having given the circuit courts
jurisdiction over causes instituted by the Bank of the United
States, cannot be construed to have given that jurisdiction to the
District Court of Kentucky. Of course it has not been conferred on
the District Court of Alabama by the act establishing that court.
Neither has it been conferred by the act establishing the Bank of
the United States.
The judgment is affirmed with costs.
This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record
from the District Court of the United States for the Southern
District of Alabama and was argued by counsel. On consideration
whereof it is the opinion of this Court that there was no error in
the judgment of the said district court in dismissing this cause
for want of jurisdiction. Whereupon it is considered, ordered, and
adjudged by this Court that the judgment of the said district court
in this cause be and the same is hereby affirmed without costs.
